Literature DB >> 22834963

Evaluating the learning curve of experienced laparoscopic surgeons in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg1, Hasan A R Qazi, Sigrun Holze, Meinhard Mende, Martin Nicolaus, Toni Franz, Phuc Ho Thi, Anja Dietel, Evangelos Liatsikos, Minh Do.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Radical prostatectomy is the gold standard surgical treatment for organ-confined prostate cancer. There is no consensus on the impact of previous laparoscopic experience on the learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP). We compared the perioperative complications and early patient outcomes from our initial 100 cases of RALP with laparoscopic prostatectomy (LRP) cases performed well beyond the learning curve. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between July 2011 and January 2012, 110 RALP were performed by one of two surgeons, each with previous experience of more than 1000 LRP. The cases were pair matched from among the last 208 patients who had undergone LRP by the same surgeons at the same time. The clinical parameters, operative details, postoperative complications, and short-term outcomes from these patients, collected prospectively, were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: The prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and age of the two groups was similar. The operative time (128.4 vs 153.9 min; P=0.01) and blood loss (200 vs 254 mL; P=0.01) was significantly less for the LRP group, but the duration of catheterization was similar (5.89 vs 6.2 days). The complication rate was low. No procedures needed conversions, and no patient had a visceral injury or blood transfusion. Twenty-three patients in the LRP group and 33 patients in the RALP group had extraprostatic disease, and the positive margin rate was 14% and 19% for these respective groups. At 3 months, PSA level was undetectable in 94% of LRP and 92% RALP patients, while 56% and 65% (P=0.062) patients in these groups were using 0 to 2 pads per day.
CONCLUSIONS: The initial results of the outcome of RALP are at least at par with those of LRP and with those of previously published RALP series. This suggests the lack of a steep learning curve for experienced laparoscopic surgeons in performing RALP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22834963     DOI: 10.1089/end.2012.0262

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  11 in total

1.  Developing technical expertise in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy in a moderate-volume center through a proctor-based team approach.

Authors:  Shieh Ling Bang; Keng Siang Png; Yu Yi Yeow; Gerald Yau Min Tan; Yew Lam Chong
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2014-04-20

Review 2.  Comparison of perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes between standard laparoscopic and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xing Huang; Lei Wang; Xinmin Zheng; Xinghuan Wang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Positive surgical margin rates during the robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy learning curve of an experienced laparoscopic surgeon.

Authors:  Anthony F Adili; Julia Di Giovanni; Emma Kolesar; Nathan C Wong; Jen Hoogenes; Shawn Dason; Bobby Shayegan
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Transurethral marking incision of the bladder neck: a helpful technique in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy involving post-transurethral resection of the prostate and cancers protruding into the bladder neck.

Authors:  Satoshi Kurokawa; Keiichi Tozawa; Yukihiro Umemoto; Takahiro Yasui; Kentaro Mizuno; Atsushi Okada; Noriyasu Kawai; Yutaro Hayashi; Kenjiro Kohri
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2013-08-17       Impact factor: 2.264

5.  The influence of previous robotic experience in the initial learning curve of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  José Anastácio Dias; Marcos F Dall'oglio; João Roberto Colombo; Rafael F Coelho; William Carlos Nahas
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2017 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.541

Review 6.  Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy has lower biochemical recurrence than laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Seon Heui Lee; Hyun Ju Seo; Na Rae Lee; Soo Kyung Son; Dae Keun Kim; Koon Ho Rha
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2017-04-28

7.  Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: comparison of oncological outcomes at a single center.

Authors:  Takatsugu Okegawa; Shota Omura; Mio Samejima; Naoki Ninomiya; Satoru Taguchi; Yu Nakamura; Tsuyoshi Yamaguchi; Mitsuhiro Tambo; Hiroshi Fukuhara
Journal:  Prostate Int       Date:  2019-12-07

Review 8.  Comparison Between Robotic and Laparoscopic or Open Anastomoses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Ioannis D Kostakis; Harkiran Sran; Raphael Uwechue; Pankaj Chandak; Jonathon Olsburgh; Nizam Mamode; Ioannis Loukopoulos; Nicos Kessaris
Journal:  Robot Surg       Date:  2019-12-23

9.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic total extraperitoneal hernia repair during prostatectomy: technique and initial experience.

Authors:  Hasan A R Qazi; Bhavan Prasad Rai; Minh Do; Matthew Rewhorn; Tim Häfner; Evangelos Liatsikos; Panagiotis Kallidonis; Anja Dietel; Jens Uwe Stolzenburg
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2015-06-18

10.  Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy learning curve for experienced laparoscopic surgeons: does it really exist?

Authors:  Marcos Tobias-Machado; Anuar Ibrahim Mitre; Mauricio Rubinstein; Eduardo Fernandes da Costa; Alexandre Kyoshi Hidaka
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.